Q1-2. The case studies provided a deeper understanding of the interaction betweentechnical, organizational and process components of “complex” real options incomplex systems.The interaction between technology, organizations and processes was apparentthroughout the research. In the quantitative analysis, quantitative values could not bedetermined using “standard” real option evaluation techniques. Instead, explicitconsideration of organizations and processes had to be incorporated into the quantitativeevaluation process. For example, in the BWB case study, the quantitative analysisincluded consideration of corporate strategy, product line decisions, response tocompetitor actions, enterprise architecture and different accounting methods (i.e. programlevel costs and benefits versus enterprise level costs and benefits). In the ITS case study,the quantitative analysis included valuation with different metrics and related enterprisearchitectures. The quantitative results generated were in part determined by these socialsystem considerations.During the interview phase of the research, multiple examples were raised bystakeholders that attested to the existence of practical considerations that affected thehoped-for flexibility. Without considering the interaction of the technologies,organizations and processes involved in “complex” real options in complex systems, itseems unlikely that a realistic value can be determined for the benefits provided fromflexibility. More importantly, without these considerations it is unlikely that flexibilitycould be designed such that it would be worthwhile, when taking practical considerationsinto account. For example, in the BWB case study, the enterprise’s program-centricarchitecture (PCA) makes cross-family derivatives difficult to implement in practice,regardless of the value calculated from the quantitative analysis.Q1-3. The plurality of flexibilities that were found across stakeholders, withflexibilities addressing technical, funding and political uncertainties, often seembeyond the uses of flexibility as a way of dealing with uncertainty discussed in theresearch literature.Multiple types of flexibilities were found in use across the range of stakeholders thatwere interviewed. These flexibilities included flexibilities such as:• Options that also appeared in the literature in detail, such as aircraft derivatives,• Options that have only started to become identified in the literature, such as theuse of ITS managed lanes for operational flexibility,• Options that have received no attention in the literature, such as the use of realoptions in systems to create political compromise.These options also spanned multiple classes of options, including:• “Standard” real options, such as the Katy HOT to LRT conversion,429